Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters "Backward safety ?"

CZ has always gotten a lot of flack for their "backwards safety" where you have to pull the safety rearward in order to fire the rifle.

This got me to thinking why it is considered "backwards" and why do some folks find fault with it? For most of firearms history in order to fire a firearm it involved pulled a hammer rearwards but yet somewhere along the way in order to fire a non-hammered firearm they were mainly developed to push the safety forward in order to fire.

What was the reasoning behind the change? Is there something logical behind it that I am missing? I have done a lot of shooting with CZ and for me pulling the safety rearward to fire is no different than pulling the hammer rearward on a rifle equipted with them.

I have no problem pushing a trigger guard mounted safety to side before I fire it, or swiping a frame mounted safety down instead of pushing forward, although I will admit that I once had a semi-auto pistol that required pushing the safety up to fire was a bit disconcerting.

drover

Have had basically the same experience, probably due to using a bunch of different safeties (and hammer guns) over the decades.

But it might also be due to my very first .22 rimfire repeater, a Marlin Model 81 tube-magazine bolt, also has a "backwards" safety....

The safeties on my CZs never bothered me. I don’t get what all the fuss is about. It might be that of the many different rifles I own and hunt with, there are several different types of safeties. Cross bolt safeties on Marlins, trigger guard safety on a 7600, push safety on 700s, swing/wing safeties on Kimbers, Winchesters and Mauser. I suppose if you ran a 700 your whole life and nothing else, a CZ might give you some trouble.

Tokarevs

Have never had an issue with various safeties.
That said, the safety is why I don't own one of the mini Czs.
Or an old marlin 22.

Constantly check the safety when hunting, don't want one I might release
thinking I was pitting it on safe.

Had a experience with an old bolt action 12 gauge.
A guy handed it to me to load,we were hunting for whatever was killing
Chickens. Don't remember how, but it was only back at his house that I discovered
I had been walking around hot, and unsafed.

Lot of Monday quaterbacking gonna happen over that. IDGAF, but might agree!
Accidents are rarely the product of a single failure, I provided at least 1,
an odd operating gun provided a second.

Same with my first rifle, a Marlin 25.

There are whiners and doers.

It's never bothered me a bit. Humans are adaptable.

After you use it once you should be good to go.

I suppose that I could adapt, but don't want to and that backward safety is the reason that I've never bought a CZ rifle. The pulling back the hammer is a good analogy that I never thought about, but having had a bolt action Cooper, Winchester, Ruger, Remington and a Mossberg where the safety all went forward, I think that backward safety has cost CZ some market share. Okay, that lever safety on my Savage 99F is "backward" and that even irks me some.

Safeties are part of a package, learn how they work and move on down the road. Have a couple of guns w/o safeties…OMG! Wanna screw with someone’s noodle? Hand them an underhammer ML.

I've owned and hunted with single shots, bolt actions, pumps, levers, cock on open bolts, cock on close bolts, safeties of all types, long actions, short actions, etc.! Never once had an issue in the field because of unfamiliarity or indecisiveness with the firearm in hand. Guess I just don't know how bad such things can impact you.

CZ455 has backwards safety.
Annoying.
Might cost me some ankle meat if charged by an enraged chipmunk.

Always aware of it being different, so no big deal. Just seems silly though.

We found the "backward" safeties on early Marlin rimfires and CZ's did create problems for us and our kids. Mostly they weren't consistent with the other firearms used.

Thankfully, when Marlin changed its safeties on rimfire bolt guns the new safeeties were usable on the older rifle. We would peen out and restamp the F and S when we changed the safeties. I probably did it to at least 8 of them. Most of which are still in the family.

I have owned a few 452s, still have one in 17 HM2, and while I don't care for the safety, I don't think about it too much. I can see where it might be a potential liability issue, but I'm not an attorney.

My personal preference is for as much similarity between my gun's function as possible. I wouldn't want a trigger that I had to push forward.

And then there are the locks where you have to put the key in upside-down..

Missed a coyote one day because of a backward safety on a CZ 455. From pure habit just tried to push it L to R like every other rifle I own and no bang. Coyote was on the move so by the time I realized what had happed it was too late. Sold it, bought a 457 and have zero desire to go back.

How about shotguns that require the trigger to be released to fire?

Jim

My first .22 is a Glenfield bolt action (Marlin iirc) and it too has the “backwards” safety.

I doubt if anyone here had been born when the last exposed hammer gun design was introduced. And bolt rifles were invented nearly 40 years before the 1st lever action. For most of us moving the safety forward is just more natural.

I can't explain why, but if I have a lever gun in my hands I don't even have to think about pulling the hammer back before shooting. But with a bolt action the safety is just supposed to go forward. When I had a CZ 452 it was a problem. Same with cross bolt safeties on most repeating shotguns and many rifles. I'm used to the safety behind the trigger guard, the ones in the front throw me off.

And the backwards safety/decocker on most DA/SA pistols was something I never really liked. A 1911 style safety is just more natural for me.

Drover: Maybe YOU should direct your inquiry to CZ as they "decided" to change that "bassackwards" safety on their newer models.
Yeah ask CZ why they changed that abberation?
I know I refused to buy any of their rimfire models until they "corrected" this anomaly!
Forward is fire on the vast majority of American Rifles and Rifles sold in America.
I did buy a pair of used CZ "bassackwards" safety rimfire Rifles at give-away prices but only to turn them for a profit NOT for my use.
I did buy a new CZ 457 Varmint rimfire with the corrected safety.
FORWARD is fire!
PERIOD!
But as the french say - to each their own.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Then I guess you wouldn't like this trigger:



It's a pre-war Pacific double set trigger. The front trigger is pushed forward to set the rear trigger. It only fires if set, simply pulling the rear trigger won't fire it. Krag converted to single shot, chambered for .22 Maximum Lovell, built by Hervey Lovell circa 1939.

Then there's Martinis, most of which don't possess a safety:



Protocol when hunting is to keep a round up the spout with the breech opened. Snap it shut when wanting to shoot. .357 Maximum, maker unknown.

If a safety that operates backwards from a 700 style gives a fella fits he might take up knitting or golf.

I'll be damned. I never knew such existed. You are right, that would be awkward for me. Especially if I needed to engage in instinctive shooting.

Make sure you’re familiar with a different style safety than what you are used to. A missed opportunity due to fiddling with a safety will haunt a hunter for a long time.
Please don’t ask.

When I bought my 452 by the 3rd squirrel it was 2nd nature.

My Remington Model 34 NRA target has a "backwards" safety. After shooting it for a while, it makes "recent" safeties seem backwards.

Then, there's the pre-tang safety Savage 99s....

Yea I don’t get it - l have a bunch of CZs (old and new)and other types of rifles/shotguns that have a “backwards” safety (or like some other here no safety at all) and have yet to not remember how they function when in use - guess it’s just too much thinking for some?

PennDog

Yep

If different than your normal stuff, just means you have to czech it more often 😉

Ha!! Best comment yet! They are all "normal" if you practise and pay attention to what you're doing. I have four CZ rifles with the "pull to fire" safeties mixed in with a bunch of push to fire rifles. And some exposed hammer guns. No problem for me to switch between any of them.

yeah. But you can walk and chew gum at the same time.....

I believe it was Seyfried who said in an article something along the lines that a safety was just a crutch to make some feel good about having a gun in their hands. If you can’t handle any firearm without some mechanical block to curtail a kaboom, I’m with 10guage and think one should take up something akin to crochet.

I wonder how a guy goes from shooting a CZ with a backwards safety to shooting a Winchester 1300 with the safety in front of the trigger.

Used 'em. don't like 'em. won't own one. Forward is always "go".

I have no problem using tang, side lever safeties, thumb-cockers (my '94, & ML.) or the R to L push button ones (Win 1200). Or "backwards" ones, but I bet a left-hand shooter would have a time with that 1200..... . I've no problem going from one safety style to another on my familiarized guns (the key). I don't even hav to think of it anymore.

I really, really hate "backwards" safeties. I just do. It's counter-intuitive to me, and why have a gun with a "safety" you don't like, and might make a muscle-memory mistake with.

Sue me.

Muscle memory has it's place - why fook with the odds, but YMMV, especially if that fooked up safety is on the only gun you own and carry frequently.

Plus, with some exceptions, I don't carry hot unless shooting is imminent, just because I don't trust safeties of any sort very much. Having a backwards one is just one more thing on the negative side.

The reason: It is like cocking a hammer. The rest are a$$ backwards.

Years ago, L C Smith had a safety that worked whether pulled or pushed. The problem was you could never be sure when it was on safe. I worked with a fellow that lost part of his hand by lifting his LC by the muzzle. He shouldn't have done that but thirteen year olds sometimes make poor decisions.
I prefer to push safties forward or down, and pull hammers back, but I'm and old dog that doesn't enjoy learning new tricks.
Bfly

No issues with my CZ 204 varmint. I simply look at the safety when I load it and my thumb goes to autopilot when I pick it up. Same as switching back and forth between my 870 and 1100. Have never tried to pump the auto or not pump the pump. Same thing with my single trigger vs double triggered double/OU shotguns. I never have to think about it. Guess that’s why I never took up the knitting needles.

If you caveat hunting dangerous game and/or daily carry weapons, one could just carry a cold chamber.

I purposely left shotguns out. Unless you're hunting over one hellacious pointer it's pretty hard to run a shotgun cold.

Depends. I walk the buffaloberry draws for sharptails with a cold chamber, hammer down, Wingmaster. I can pump that shotgun on the way up about as fast as I can push a safety.

Did not do the CZ route until the 457 emerged for that reason.

If near time for a shot…….I carry the rifle with my thumb on the safety
If a quick shot I pull the safety as I raise the rifle to my shoulder
I don’t see the problem…….